Messages

91

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 09:20:35 AM »

I'm in the same situation. I still have a 350D (yes they still exist), and plan to ugrade in the near future. In the race are the 6D, and the upcoming APS-C models (70D? 7D MkII?). I only shoot as an amateur, and I'm really asking myself if it is worth to upgrade to a FF (6D).

DOF is one point, but I think that the DOF is already quite shallow on a APS-C with a decent lens; especially when you are close to the subject. There is a range in distance where the FF would be helpful, but is it worth the money?
Reach; this is only a question of money. Are you willing to pay twice as much for a lens, to get the same reach with a FF, as you would have to with a APS-C? Croping is not an option; why should I pay for Sensor-area I do not use?
IQ/Noise. This is the biggest issue. But living with 8.5MP for 7 years showed me, that the quality of an Image is not measured in ISO, Noise or dynamic range. Sure, Images from a FF look really nice. I compared the pictures from FF to APS-C on The-Digital-Picture.com, and the the FF looks much better (no surprise), but then I looked at the comparison tool at dpreview and there the verdict was not so clear anymore. Sure FF is always better, but by how much?
If you are a pro, then it is easy to deceide, but as an amateur I'm still asking myself if it is worth to upgrade.

Same boat. If I could only find a 24-105 f/4 equivalent for my 60D, I would sure hold it for now and upgrade to FF when(ever) I start making money from photography. I would stick to my 50 1.4 and get a 35 1.4 (or a 28 1.8?) and an 85 1.8, and have fun!

92

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 09:01:04 AM »

So I ask you FF shooters: what is it that you can do nowadays with you FF that you would no longer be able to do if you downgraded to crop?

I'd miss the thinner DoF you can achieve with FF, for the same framing.  To get the FF-equivalent of f/1.2 on APS-C would require an f/0.75 lens...last time I checked, there weren't any in a Canon EF mount.

If your long shots are at the long end of your current zoom lens and you shoot from a distance, you will miss the reach.

Well, we've had this discussion before.     The reach only matters if your output demands it.  A FF image cropped to the same FoV of an APS-C sensor will have essentially the same IQ - the only thing you're really giving up is megapixels.  So, if 7-8 MP is sufficient (which it is for web, slideshows, and prints up to ~12x18" - and I suspect that covers most people's needs), then a cropped FF shot will do just as well as an uncropped APS-C shot. 

Does it possibly make sense to stick with a crop sensor for telephoto/sports needs and a full frame with a "normal" lens for general photography?

From a sensor standpoint, not to me (again with the caveat above regarding need for high MP output).  Especially if you're not focal length limited.  One of the keys for sports is a high shutter speed to stop action, and the much better high ISO performance of a FF sensor means you can push the ISO higher to get a shutter speed that stops the action.  With the sensor in the 60D (I have a 7D), I really prefer to keep the ISO at 1600 or lower.  With the 5DII, I had no problem shooting at ISO 3200.  With the 1D X, I routinely use ISO 6400, and I'm fine with ISO 12800.  That's 3 stops better than I prefer on the 7D (although I can tolerate ISO 3200 on the 7D, so call it 2 stops to be conservative...but still that's the difference between a blurry 1/250 s and a crisp 1/1000 s).

Of course, the sensor is only part of the story for sports/action.  The AF system is the other big part.  For fast action, I'd take the 7D and live with the noise vs. the 5DII/6D and lower noise.  The 7D's tracking capabilities are far superior to the 5DII, and will be similarly superior to the 6D.  But I'd take the 5DIII over the 7D in a heartbeat for sports/action - FF for higher ISO and even better AF more than makes up for the loss of 2 fps.

I can tell you that after getting the 1D X, my 7D has just gathered dust.  As I stated above, IMO a FF image cropped to the same FoV of an APS-C sensor will have essentially the same IQ.  I tested that semi-formally with the 5DII vs. 7D (with a static test scene) and proved it to my satisfaction.  I've actually decided to test my statement above with the 1D X vs. the 7D, with a 600/4 lens, comparing the 1D X and 1.4xIII vs. the 7D (as approximately equivalent focal lengths), and also at the longest AF-capable focal length (1200mm f/8 on the 1D X, 1344mm equivalent f/5.6 on the 7D).  This will be a 'formal' test with an ISO 12233-based chart, and a static 'real world' scene.  If the 1D X cropped gives equal or better IQ vs. the 7D, I'll need to decide if I sell the 7D or keep it solely as a backup camera.

Do you actually own those lenses?

93

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 08:42:01 AM »

My first dSLR was a 7D, I recently bought a 5D3.  Technically speaking I upgraded my camera because the 5D3 is superior in many areas.  But I am not of the camp that a FF is an automatic upgrade over a crop--its apples and oranges, trucks and cars.

I shot film cameras for many years so I've always been use to the FF FOV.  Adding a FF body gives me a better low-light, landscape, and portrait (shallow DOF) option.  My 7D gives me a the reach and FPS benefit.  I'm lucky enough to have two excellent bodies for different uses.   

I'd add, too, although I'm not as lucky as you are and would own only a 60D and a 6D!
The 60D would be kept to walk around and as backup, since I don't need too much reach (and you can always crop those 20 MP files) and 4 fps seem enough for what I shoot.
Thanks for answering!

94

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 08:30:53 AM »

my camera of choice is now crop, smaller and lighter....

!
That's sure unusual, considering you shoot weddings!
To be honest, I don't care much about size and weight, although I don't have to carry my gear around for hours like you do.
Don't you miss the low-light advantages of FF?
Would you mind if I asked you what gear you use for weddings? Your camera, lenses...
Very nice pics on your website, btw!

95

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 08:08:05 AM »

Well, no small number of FF shooters would miss the ability to post smug things about how superior FF is on intangible things like dreamy bokeh, color saturation, etc..., whether they could actually pick a FF print out of a police lineup or not.   

LOL

I think the biggest thing about going FF to crop would be losing 2 or 3 stops of low-noise performance at higher ISO settings, at least when comparing it to the newest FF bodies.  That is very valuable stuff.

That's my main reason for upgrading, indeed. Good to know there's not a huge benefit on DoF (and I'm pretty happy with the blur I can get with my 50, too). What I find a little annoying about crop is that you don't get to use great zoom lenses like the 24-70 or the 24-105 as an all-around, since you lose the WA advantage; I could buy the 17-55 f/2.8, but it's not as wide as I wish and it manages to cost more than the 24-105 L!

96

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:55:21 AM »

Hi all,
I've been shooting with a 60D (my first dSLR) since 2010 or 2011, and am naturally considering going FF. The thing is, everybody asks, "will I benefit from going FF?", and the answer is more likely "yes" -- although it sure depends on the photographer and his/her uses for the camera. What we seldom know is, do these folks who upgraded and now have better gear take better pics now, or is it all the same? For how many of them has upgrading made significant difference?
So I ask you FF shooters: what is it that you can do nowadays with you FF that you would no longer be able to do if you downgraded to crop?
Hope it doesn't sound too crazy -- it makes sense in my mind...
Cheers!

If your long shots are at the long end of your current zoom lens and you shoot from a distance, you will miss the reach.

I mainly shoot wide, so not a problem for me. Good, one less thing to worry!

Good! Then the only thing to worry about is that you will miss the grainy look at high ISO
 

Thank God LR lets me put it back where it belongs! LOL

97

EOS Bodies / Re: Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:50:05 AM »

Hi all,
I've been shooting with a 60D (my first dSLR) since 2010 or 2011, and am naturally considering going FF. The thing is, everybody asks, "will I benefit from going FF?", and the answer is more likely "yes" -- although it sure depends on the photographer and his/her uses for the camera. What we seldom know is, do these folks who upgraded and now have better gear take better pics now, or is it all the same? For how many of them has upgrading made significant difference?
So I ask you FF shooters: what is it that you can do nowadays with you FF that you would no longer be able to do if you downgraded to crop?
Hope it doesn't sound too crazy -- it makes sense in my mind...
Cheers!

If your long shots are at the long end of your current zoom lens and you shoot from a distance, you will miss the reach.

I mainly shoot wide, so not a problem for me. Good, one less thing to worry!

98

EOS Bodies / Downgrade to crop

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:35:36 AM »

Hi all,
I've been shooting with a 60D (my first dSLR) since 2010 or 2011, and am naturally considering going FF. The thing is, everybody asks, "will I benefit from going FF?", and the answer is more likely "yes" -- although it sure depends on the photographer and his/her uses for the camera. What we seldom know is, do these folks who upgraded and now have better gear take better pics now, or is it all the same? For how many of them has upgrading made significant difference?
So I ask you FF shooters: what is it that you can do nowadays with you FF that you would no longer be able to do if you downgraded to crop?
Hope it doesn't sound too crazy -- it makes sense in my mind...
Cheers

99

EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.

« on: December 02, 2012, 11:00:54 AM »

Here is what you asked for: iso3200 and 6400 comparisons

Both look the same and very good to me

100

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What is the 6d actually good at (*positive* fact list)?

« on: December 02, 2012, 05:58:52 AM »

What I like about it

Over the 5DIII - It is cheaper (and I am realistic enough that this means certain features are given up)

Over the 5DII - It is newer.  It is smaller. It is lighter. Has GPS and WiFi. And I know it is still not proven but I am sure better IQ. Takes my SD cards (I do not have CF cards)

Over the D600 - Well it takes my EF lenses and EX flash  , so really the rest of the spec list is a moot point

Over the 7D - it is FF

Over my 500D - it is FF.  better sealed. better IQ. better focus. better view finder.

Almost the same for me, except that I don't care about small size or GPS/WiFi. In fact, I have a 60D and wish it was just a tad bigger, but it's alright. On the other hand, weight matters, and GPS and WiFi only adds a few grams without benefit (I guess), in my case. Good points for me:
- Affordable first FF
- IQ in low-light
- Shallower DoF than my 60D
- Allows me to use the good-and-now-very-cheap-for-what-it-offers 24-105 f/4L and stop thinking what to get for a decent wide-angle I could use whenever I upgrade to FF (main reason for me)
- Good battery life
Cheers

101

EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.

« on: December 01, 2012, 09:17:39 AM »

Do you guys think the 6D pics are overexposed in comparison to the 5DIII? I noticed that the shadows seem to be lighter on the 6D shots, with the white parts (e.g., white frame) looking the same (i.e., no overall overexposure). Would that mean better DR or is it nonsense?

102

EOS Bodies / Re: Just ordered a 6D...

« on: December 01, 2012, 09:09:19 AM »

the outside points have a little trouble in low light as predicted, no problem with the AF Assist on my flash turned on though, and no worries under normal lighting, roughly on par with the centre point of my 600D I had over my other shoulder

Don't have a 5D3 to compare other than in store, which won't really tell me much.

As for the portrait shoot I did the day I got the camera, accuracy was spot on when focusing on the eye, even with a non canon 70-200 2.8

Sounds good to me!
Thanks!

103

EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.

« on: November 30, 2012, 05:08:13 PM »

Here is a screen shot at 100% of two files in Photoshop CS6.

6400 ISO is on the left, 50 ISO on the right. Opened in PS with all defaults, no NR, exposure, or other adjustments.

Great, many thanks!
Can you post comparisons so we can see how it goes versus the 5DIII and the D600?

104

EOS Bodies / Re: New Pro Canon body tested by Steve McCurry???

« on: November 30, 2012, 03:46:37 PM »

A part from an extremely enviable fotoshoot in an exotic location surrounded by beautiful girls it seems good old Steve could also be testing out a new pro-body prototype from Canon. I know it seems weird given his decade long affiliation with Nikon, but check out this video at exactly 18:37. Appearing is a 1DX type body with a very unusual grip (a 1DX without the outer rubber part perhaps) and – revealingly - missing the Canon logo

Pirelli calendrier 2013 on Vimeo

What do you think guys?

Yep, looks like a Canon to me

105

EOS Bodies / Re: More 6D sample images - with RAW files.

« on: November 30, 2012, 03:33:21 PM »

There are raw download links under each sample.




And for those wondering, the raw 7.3 is on the Adobe Labs site but the 6D isn't listed as being compatible. The S110 & G15 are with a lens profile for the 24-70L II.

Have you had success opening the raw files? I haven't...